I guess I wasn't clear. I was only proposing doing the dot product against the same subset of users as you were; I was just replacing your counting occurrences with something that would actually be able to tell if the user tended to rate things the same way you do. Unless your version filters out negative ratings altogether, it doesn't seem to distinguish between someone who likes everything you like and someone who dislikes everything you like, so long as you all rated the same things.
Better than "do a frequency count for username" would be something along the lines of "do a dot product of my ratings vector with username's ratings vector and normalize." Optionally, weight for margin of error (so the user who really likes one thing that you really like but otherwise doesn't intersect with your ratings vector at all ranks lower than the one who likes a dozen things you likes and hates half a dozen things that you hate.)
Unless you propose to ask the user for that password every time they want to do something with their bookmarks, how is having it going to prevent other programs from creating bookmarks? It's just an extra step: read password from wherever Firefox stores it, write to bookmark file.
If that's the case, they chose a dumb place to put it, because the exploit doesn't even work on Windows 2000 and below without some program installed to handle WMF files.
Some program like the print spooler, perhaps? One wonders if the flaw also exist{s|ed} in EMF files.
I went for years with zero spam at my work email address, because I never let it get out into the wild. One day, a few years ago, I screwed up and posted to Bugtraq with that address, and it ended up on all of the websites where Bugtraq gets archived. Other than that one leak, and maybe a leak or two to another mailing list, I don't believe my email address has ever gotten into the wild. I've certainly never used that address to do anything porn-related.
Today, I get about 100 spam emails a day at that address, advertising all the usual scams including hardcore pornography. I don't even read past the subject lines, and I still see stuff that would offend 90% of the population.
There are a number of things you might install a CBT hook for, even legitimate ones, but with the hook installed it absolutely is "monitoring" all keypresses and mouse moves.
Microsoft seems to disagree. From the documentation of CBTProc in the MSDN Library:
The HCBT_CLICKSKIPPED value is sent to a CBTProc hook procedure only if a WH_MOUSE hook is installed. For a list of hit-test codes, see WM_NCHITTEST.
The HCBT_KEYSKIPPED value is sent to a CBTProc hook procedure only if a WH_KEYBOARD hook is installed.
So, even if Zango is setting a CBT hook - and TFA has been revised to say they aren't - they're not getting mouse and keyboard events unless they (or, potentially, someone else) are also setting either a mouse or a keyboard hook.
Also, the new Onion page doesn't work with Firefox and Flashblock. Something about the code they use to place Flash conditionally pukes and spews code fragments all over the page.
At least someone finally pulled their head out of their ass long enough to get rid of all the stupid little Flash section headers.
I think I heard this guy interviewed on NPR's Day to Day a month or two ago. He contends that it works better than noise cancellation because the nonsense doesn't activate the speech-recognition parts of the brain in the same way that even a quiet conversation down the hall might. In some sense, your brain gives up on trying to interpret the babble and starts ignoring it, whereas a barely-audible conversation will just make some part of your brain work harder to attempt to pick out the signal from the noise.
So, in your case, you would actually be less distracted by the stupid people in the next cube, even though they might objectively be a bit louder.
Uh? Who's innocent? My innocent? I don't have an innocent, she must belong to someone else.
You might want to look up the difference between your and you're.
You might want to look up the difference between who's and whose.
Re:No Australian spammers!
on
Real-time Spam Map
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Last time I looked, Google wasn't using a Mercator projection. The Mercator projection adjusts the distance between latitude lines as you move further from the equator so as to keep Rhumb lines straight, but Google's projection is just a plain ol' cylindrical projection with a standard parallel of 39.5 degrees. The result is that while Greenland still appears too large, it doesn't appear as large as it would on a Mercator projection (because it's only exaggerated horizontally, not vertically.)
The indictment contains various counts of conspiracy to dispense controlled substances, wire fraud, money laundering, distributing controlled substances and introducing misbranded drugs into interstate commerce.
That bolded bit there sure makes it look like someone didn't think people were getting what they thought they were.
Personally, I think that automated messages should be illegal, or at the minimum, they should comply with ("press 1 to be taken off this list, press 2 for our contact information").
It shall be unlawful for any person within the United States--
[...]
(B) to initiate any telephone call to any residential telephone line using an artificial or prerecorded voice to deliver a message without the prior express consent of the called party, unless the call is initiated for emergency purposes or is exempted by rule or order by the Commission under paragraph (2)(B);
Good luck figuring out who the bastards are, though. And sadly, (2)(B) has the potential to exempt political and other noncommercial calls.
Shrek 2 might be an exception, though it responds just fine to the fast forward button. For reference, this is on a Pioneer DVD recorder, which might take such things a bit more seriously than the latest offering from iLo or Apex.
I miss the "other" undocumented feature on the Apex AD600A that made it forget about unskippable content if you turned off PBC and then turned it back on.
As far as I know, the USGS photos are montaged, registered and adjusted by the USGS, so quite what Google think they've contributed to that is unclear.
Well, they have reprojected them to their ugly, ill-considered cylindrical projection. Does that count for anything?
Interestingly, whatever Google uses to post-process their scripts also chooses the variable names randomly. I've got three versions of the Google Maps scripts here, and even though each of them starts off with the same code, the variable names are all utterly different. I've assumed that it's done that way in an attempt to either evade diff, or prevent a third party piggybacking additional code on the Google code.
I'm sure nobody cares anymore, since this has fallen off the front page, but the current CVS version of GPSBabel now decodes the route information from Google Maps XML files (the stuff the perl code above was supposed to deal with.)
The code's a lot cleaner, too, for you picky folks.
Re:what about plotting waypoints on the map?
on
Mapping Google Maps
·
· Score: 1
Yes, but this code isn't actually about putting waypoints on the map, regardless of what the subject might say. This code is about taking the computed route and putting it in a form that can be used with a GPS receiver or other mapping software.
For what it's worth, I've actually taken the output from that Perl script and fed it to Street Atlas 2003. It lined up well enough with the streets that whatever differences there were are probably due to either the age of the data or the compression that DeLorme applies.
Slashdot Mirror
I guess I wasn't clear. I was only proposing doing the dot product against the same subset of users as you were; I was just replacing your counting occurrences with something that would actually be able to tell if the user tended to rate things the same way you do. Unless your version filters out negative ratings altogether, it doesn't seem to distinguish between someone who likes everything you like and someone who dislikes everything you like, so long as you all rated the same things.
Better than "do a frequency count for username" would be something along the lines of "do a dot product of my ratings vector with username's ratings vector and normalize." Optionally, weight for margin of error (so the user who really likes one thing that you really like but otherwise doesn't intersect with your ratings vector at all ranks lower than the one who likes a dozen things you likes and hates half a dozen things that you hate.)
Unless you propose to ask the user for that password every time they want to do something with their bookmarks, how is having it going to prevent other programs from creating bookmarks? It's just an extra step: read password from wherever Firefox stores it, write to bookmark file.
You've obviously gotten lucky.
I went for years with zero spam at my work email address, because I never let it get out into the wild. One day, a few years ago, I screwed up and posted to Bugtraq with that address, and it ended up on all of the websites where Bugtraq gets archived. Other than that one leak, and maybe a leak or two to another mailing list, I don't believe my email address has ever gotten into the wild. I've certainly never used that address to do anything porn-related.
Today, I get about 100 spam emails a day at that address, advertising all the usual scams including hardcore pornography. I don't even read past the subject lines, and I still see stuff that would offend 90% of the population.
Also the Quantum Q2020 and Q2040. (20- and 40-megabyte 8" drives.)
I have one of each, somewhere, though probably no longer in working condition.
Microsoft seems to disagree. From the documentation of CBTProc in the MSDN Library:
So, even if Zango is setting a CBT hook - and TFA has been revised to say they aren't - they're not getting mouse and keyboard events unless they (or, potentially, someone else) are also setting either a mouse or a keyboard hook.
Also, the new Onion page doesn't work with Firefox and Flashblock. Something about the code they use to place Flash conditionally pukes and spews code fragments all over the page.
At least someone finally pulled their head out of their ass long enough to get rid of all the stupid little Flash section headers.
I think I heard this guy interviewed on NPR's Day to Day a month or two ago. He contends that it works better than noise cancellation because the nonsense doesn't activate the speech-recognition parts of the brain in the same way that even a quiet conversation down the hall might. In some sense, your brain gives up on trying to interpret the babble and starts ignoring it, whereas a barely-audible conversation will just make some part of your brain work harder to attempt to pick out the signal from the noise.
So, in your case, you would actually be less distracted by the stupid people in the next cube, even though they might objectively be a bit louder.
You might want to look up the difference between who's and whose.
Last time I looked, Google wasn't using a Mercator projection. The Mercator projection adjusts the distance between latitude lines as you move further from the equator so as to keep Rhumb lines straight, but Google's projection is just a plain ol' cylindrical projection with a standard parallel of 39.5 degrees. The result is that while Greenland still appears too large, it doesn't appear as large as it would on a Mercator projection (because it's only exaggerated horizontally, not vertically.)
From TFA (Emphasis mine):
The indictment contains various counts of conspiracy to dispense controlled substances, wire fraud, money laundering, distributing controlled substances and introducing misbranded drugs into interstate commerce.
That bolded bit there sure makes it look like someone didn't think people were getting what they thought they were.Shrek 2 might be an exception, though it responds just fine to the fast forward button. For reference, this is on a Pioneer DVD recorder, which might take such things a bit more seriously than the latest offering from iLo or Apex.
I miss the "other" undocumented feature on the Apex AD600A that made it forget about unskippable content if you turned off PBC and then turned it back on.
Also, Google must have arranged for clear skies over the entire globe.
entymologically
--
You keep using that word. I do not think that it means what you think it means.
Different bastards, though the ones whose EULA you dissected are mentioned briefly in the FA.
Interestingly, whatever Google uses to post-process their scripts also chooses the variable names randomly. I've got three versions of the Google Maps scripts here, and even though each of them starts off with the same code, the variable names are all utterly different. I've assumed that it's done that way in an attempt to either evade diff, or prevent a third party piggybacking additional code on the Google code.
I'm sure nobody cares anymore, since this has fallen off the front page, but the current CVS version of GPSBabel now decodes the route information from Google Maps XML files (the stuff the perl code above was supposed to deal with.)
The code's a lot cleaner, too, for you picky folks.
Yes, but this code isn't actually about putting waypoints on the map, regardless of what the subject might say. This code is about taking the computed route and putting it in a form that can be used with a GPS receiver or other mapping software.
For what it's worth, I've actually taken the output from that Perl script and fed it to Street Atlas 2003. It lined up well enough with the streets that whatever differences there were are probably due to either the age of the data or the compression that DeLorme applies.